moo wrote:The bill that enacts the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations into UK law is The Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964. This bill gives the UK government the right to reject any diplomatic status which is granted or inferred "improperly".
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations allows this modification, because in its preamble it outright states "Realizing that the purpose of such privileges and immunities is not to benefit individuals but to ensure the efficient performance of the functions of diplomatic missions as representing States", which means that granting Assange any immunity or privilege at all which is inferred to the Ecuadorian mission is obviously done for the benefit of the individual, not the efficient performance of the function of the mission, and as such is null and void.
The British police would be well within their rights to arrest Assange the moment he stepped out of the embassy, take the diplomatic mail off him, hand it to the Embassies receptionist and walk away with Assange in handcuffs.
As I said up thread, Ecuador is more respectful of the situation than those suggesting such a course of action.
I'll be very surprised if any court withdraws his outstanding arrest warrant.
moo wrote:People do seem to like to make up seemingly interesting reasons for why the UK is in the wrong here, when they simply aren't.
And then some.